Table 1.
| Variable | 2005 | 2011 |
|---|---|---|
| Outcome Variables | ||
| Provides buprenorphine for any purpose | 98 (49%) | 107 (57%) |
| Provides buprenorphine for detoxification | 76 (37%) | 87 (46%) |
| Provides buprenorphine for maintenance | 73 (36%) | 99 (53%) |
| Sociotechnical | ||
| Percentage of OTP staff who are professionals | 35.41 (23.41) | 26.57 (18.67) |
| Percentage of staff who possess SATS’ credentialing | 37.17 (27.23) | 37.72 (22.86) |
| OTP director has extensive professional networks | 8.71 (8.74) | 7.49 (4.95) |
| Organizational-Managerial | ||
| Ownership type | ||
| Publicly owned | 40 (20%) | 17 (9%) |
| Private nonprofit | 93 (47%) | 109 (59%) |
| OTP director rates staff caseload as “high or “too high” | 78 (39%) | 60 (32%) |
| Number of clients served during past year (log) | 6.75 (1.11) | 6.59 (0.79) |
| Percentage of OTP revenue from private insurance | 8.27 (17.47) | 8.81 (17.23) |
| Market-Based | ||
| Percentage programs in OTP’s county offer methadone | 68.42 (25.36) | 53.19 (26.96) |
| Population in OTP’s county (log) | 13.27 (1.33) | 13.34 (1.28) |
| Percentage of SATS’ admits for heroin in OTP’s state | 19.62 (11.30) | 23.08 (8.88) |
| Percentage of OTP’s clients in past year injected drugs | 38.59 (29.21) | 38.49 (27.10) |
| State Regulation | ||
| State imposes special regulations on OTPs | 21 (10%) | 71 (38%) |
| State funds available to subsidize buprenorphine | 42 (20%) | 129 (71%) |
| State imposes special requirements on prescribing physicians | 30 (15%) | 8 (5%) |
| N | 202 | 187 |
Note. OTP = opioid treatment program; SATS = substance abuse treatment.
a
. Weighted by the total number of clients served in the past year by the OTP.
b
. Counts and percentages (the latter in parentheses) are reported for dichotomous variables and means and standard deviations (the latter in parentheses) are reported for continuous variables.